Week 3 EDLD 5342 Cohort 5 Wiki Group 5 Collaboration Week Three Assignment, Part 1 – Texas School Finance: Developing a Position Paper after Comparing and Analyzing District Snapshots Marie Adams, Brenda Avance, Lorissa Bailey, Jody Kotys
Hi Group 5! I have numbered the data each of us needs to contribute below. My suggestion is that we all submit data for each numbered item, then we each take a part. We can all contribute a section of the 2-4 page paper (Part 3). Since Brenda has begun posting on Part 1, would you like to be responsible for that one? I would like to take on Part 5. As far as the paper in Part 3, if we post out thoughts concerning it, I think we can organize it and put it together from there. What do you think? All, I will work on Part 1 and add to other parts as you all add more per Jody's email. Done and working on others.
FYI: AT 8:30 AM today I was kicked out of Lorissa's wiki and access was denied. I was copying Marie's additions below into LORISSA'S PAGES and copying Lorissa additions from her wiki to here. I sent a request to Wiki spaces through their help!
Week 3 Assignment
(Part 1-Wiki Group 5)
1) percentage of economically disadvantaged students District 1--93.3-----------------District 2 --20.7
District 1--93.3% of the total population of 3903 which equates to 3641 total economically disadvantaged
District 2--20.7% of the total population of 3890 which equates to 805.23 total economically disadvantaged
2) the Total Refined ADA Adjusted for Decline District 1—3,893.754----------------------District 2—4,032.937 District 1--3893.754 and District 2--4032.937
3) the Weighted ADA (WADA) for each district District 1—5,555.815---------------------District 2—4,794.076 District 1--5555.815 and District 2--4794.076
Week Three Assignment Part 1 Data
District 1
District 2
Economically Disadvantaged
93.30%
20.70%
Total Refined ADA Adjusted for Decline
3,893.754
4,032.937
Weighted Average Daily Attendance
5,555.815
4,794.076
In looking at the three factors above (I.E. percentage of disadvantaged students, the Total Refined ADA Adjusted for Decline, the Weighted ADA (WADA) for each district), the reason that District 1 with the smaller Average Daily Attendance (ADA) has the larger (Weighted Average Daily Attendance) WADA is because of the higher percentage of economically disadvantaged students. District 1 has a smaller ADA but a larger WADA because "WADA is based on the number of students attending the school district and the type of students attending the school district. For example, a district receives additional program allocations if students attending the schools are economically disadvantaged. " Excerpt from EDLD 5342 School Finance Week three lecture"
(Part 2-Wiki Group 5)
4) determine the Revenue per WADA @ Compressed Rate and using the WADA figures from #1 above District 1—$5,044----------------------District 2—$7,206
5) calculate the total target revenue (the figure is not included in your information) for the Maintenance and Operations Fund for each district District 1—5,555.815 X 5,044 = $28,023,530.86----------------------District 2—4,794.076 X 7,206 = $34,546,111.656
6) identify the total number of Teachers, Librarians, Nurses, & Counselors in each district District 1---281----------------------District 2—307
Week Three Assignment Part 2 Data
District 1
District 2
Revenue Per WADA@Compressed Rate
$5,044
$7,206
Total M&O
$1,369,340
$35,879,109
Total # of teachers, librarians,nurses & Counselor
281
307
District 1 even though they are getting more WADA funds they have fewer teachers, librarians, nurses and counselors. District 1 has less money for M&O but both districts have 7 campus.
Post to your Wiki and the professor’s cohort blog and compare your figures with at least two other cohort group submissions.
(Part 3- Wiki Group)
Using the Wiki group process and your data from # 2 above for two Texas school districts, develop a 2 – 4 page paper concerning the fact that the intent of the Weighted Average Daily Attendance was to provide more money and professionals working directly with students to District 2 than to District 1 because of the percentage of economically disadvantaged students but failed to accomplish that goal in this case, site your group thoughts on these differences and the potential positive and negative impact to each program funded under Maintenance and Operations, post to your Wiki and the professor’s cohort blog and comment on at least two other cohort group submissions.
(Part 4 is individual)
(Part 5- Wiki Group)
7) determine the 2010 Local District Property Value (DPV District 1---$145,968,635.00----------------------District 2—$2,916,187,709.00
8) the I & S Tax Collections District 1---$94,871.00----------------------District 2—$8,836,256.00
9) the Chapter 46 (EDA) totals District 1---$572,716.00----------------------District 2—$0.00
10)determine which district has the most funds available to make payments on existing debt/school facility bonds District 2 has the most funds to pay down debt with the I&S Tax Collection of $8,836.256 even with District 1having both Chapter 46 (EDA) of $572,716 and I&S of 94,871.
Week Three Assignment Part 5 Data
District 1
District 2
2010 Local District Property Value (DPV)
$145,968,635
$2,916,187,709
I&S (Interest &Sinking Fund ) Tax Collections
$94,871
$8,836,256
Chapter 46 (EDA) totals
$572,716
$0
Total
$146,636,222
$2,925,023,965
District 1 will have issues improving and maintaining their facilities compared to District 2. Due to the lack of funds District 1 will have a hard time insuring their student s safety in their facilities; unforeseen problems could cause other need improvements to be put off. Like if the air conditioning breaks and need to be replaced in August and there were scheduled upgrades for the school cafeteria. One of these will have to be put off a little longer. District 1 has a much lower tax base and would appear to be in a lower income area. One would assume that the facilities in district 1 are minimal and possibly in need of repair, however due to the high number of economically disadvantaged students in the district it is likely that it would prove difficult to pass any bond to significantly improve the standards of the facilities. District 2 seems to have a much higher tax base, possibly from some industry in the area. This district would appear to be financially stable and would most likely be able to support a bond issue for updates to facilities if necessary.
Comparing the two districts, it would be assumed that the students in district 2 would have more opportunities within the classroom because the district is able to fund more in the way of unique curriculum and technology.
Prepare a group conclusion on the possible condition of facilities in both districts and the potential impact on student learning, post to your Wiki and the professor’s cohort blog, and comment on at least two other cohort group submissions.
(Part 6- Wiki Group)
11)determine the Compensatory Education Allotment for each district District 1---$3,835,006.00---------------------District 2—$633,369.00
Develop a group statement on the potential impact on student learning, post to your Wiki and the professor’s cohort blog and comment on at least two other cohort group submissions The state compensatory education allotment provides additional financial support to school districts to teach educationally disadvantaged pupils and underachieving student and is based on the number of students participating in the free and reduced lunch program (School Funding 101 Glossary).The allotment should provide for additional services and instructional support like tutoring beyond the regular school day to help at risk and disadvantaged students compensate for academic deficiencies (School Funding 101 Glossary).
Week Three Assignment Part 6 Data
District 1
District 2
Compensatory Education Allotment
$3,835,006
$128,756
The use of the funds from compensatory education allotment could help students that are at- risk with additional programs to help them achieve in the academic setting, It could also help will fund for staff to work with students on some of the other issue that are associated with the economically disadvantage.
Week Three Assignment, Part 1 – Texas School Finance: Developing a Position Paper after Comparing and Analyzing District Snapshots
Marie Adams, Brenda Avance, Lorissa Bailey, Jody Kotys
Hi Group 5! I have numbered the data each of us needs to contribute below. My suggestion is that we all submit data for each numbered item, then we each take a part. We can all contribute a section of the 2-4 page paper (Part 3). Since Brenda has begun posting on Part 1, would you like to be responsible for that one? I would like to take on Part 5. As far as the paper in Part 3, if we post out thoughts concerning it, I think we can organize it and put it together from there. What do you think?
All, I will work on Part 1 and add to other parts as you all add more per Jody's email. Done and working on others.
FYI: AT 8:30 AM today I was kicked out of Lorissa's wiki and access was denied. I was copying Marie's additions below into LORISSA'S PAGES and copying Lorissa additions from her wiki to here. I sent a request to Wiki spaces through their help!
Week 3 Assignment
(Part 1-Wiki Group 5)
1) percentage of economically disadvantaged students
District 1--93.3-----------------District 2 --20.7
District 1--93.3% of the total population of 3903 which equates to 3641 total economically disadvantaged
District 2--20.7% of the total population of 3890 which equates to 805.23 total economically disadvantaged
2) the Total Refined ADA Adjusted for Decline
District 1—3,893.754----------------------District 2—4,032.937
District 1--3893.754 and District 2--4032.937
3) the Weighted ADA (WADA) for each district
District 1—5,555.815---------------------District 2—4,794.076
District 1--5555.815 and District 2--4794.076
District 1 has a smaller ADA but a larger WADA because "WADA is based on the number of students attending the school district and the type of students attending the school district. For example, a district receives additional program allocations if students attending the schools are economically disadvantaged. " Excerpt from EDLD 5342 School Finance Week three lecture"
(Part 2-Wiki Group 5)
4) determine the Revenue per WADA @ Compressed Rate and using the WADA figures from #1 above
District 1—$5,044----------------------District 2—$7,206
5) calculate the total target revenue (the figure is not included in your information) for the Maintenance and Operations Fund for each district
District 1—5,555.815 X 5,044 = $28,023,530.86----------------------District 2—4,794.076 X 7,206 = $34,546,111.656
6) identify the total number of Teachers, Librarians, Nurses, & Counselors in each district
District 1---281----------------------District 2—307
Post to your Wiki and the professor’s cohort blog and compare your figures with at least two other cohort group submissions.
(Part 3- Wiki Group)
Using the Wiki group process and your data from # 2 above for two Texas school districts, develop a 2 – 4 page paper concerning the fact that the intent of the Weighted Average Daily Attendance was to provide more money and professionals working directly with students to District 2 than to District 1 because of the percentage of economically disadvantaged students but failed to accomplish that goal in this case, site your group thoughts on these differences and the potential positive and negative impact to each program funded under Maintenance and Operations, post to your Wiki and the professor’s cohort blog and comment on at least two other cohort group submissions.
(Part 4 is individual)
(Part 5- Wiki Group)
7) determine the 2010 Local District Property Value (DPV
District 1---$145,968,635.00----------------------District 2—$2,916,187,709.00
8) the I & S Tax Collections
District 1---$94,871.00----------------------District 2—$8,836,256.00
9) the Chapter 46 (EDA) totals
District 1---$572,716.00----------------------District 2—$0.00
10)determine which district has the most funds available to make payments on existing debt/school facility bonds
District 2 has the most funds to pay down debt with the I&S Tax Collection of $8,836.256 even with District 1having both Chapter 46 (EDA) of $572,716 and I&S of 94,871.
District 1 will have issues improving and maintaining their facilities compared to District 2. Due to the lack of funds District 1 will have a hard time insuring their student s safety in their facilities; unforeseen problems could cause other need improvements to be put off. Like if the air conditioning breaks and need to be replaced in August and there were scheduled upgrades for the school cafeteria. One of these will have to be put off a little longer.
District 1 has a much lower tax base and would appear to be in a lower income area. One would assume that the facilities in district 1 are minimal and possibly in need of repair, however due to the high number of economically disadvantaged students in the district it is likely that it would prove difficult to pass any bond to significantly improve the standards of the facilities. District 2 seems to have a much higher tax base, possibly from some industry in the area. This district would appear to be financially stable and would most likely be able to support a bond issue for updates to facilities if necessary.
Comparing the two districts, it would be assumed that the students in district 2 would have more opportunities within the classroom because the district is able to fund more in the way of unique curriculum and technology.
Prepare a group conclusion on the possible condition of facilities in both districts and the potential impact on student learning, post to your Wiki and the professor’s cohort blog, and comment on at least two other cohort group submissions.
(Part 6- Wiki Group)
11)determine the Compensatory Education Allotment for each district
District 1---$3,835,006.00---------------------District 2—$633,369.00
Develop a group statement on the potential impact on student learning, post to your Wiki and the professor’s cohort blog and comment on at least two other cohort group submissions
The state compensatory education allotment provides additional financial support to school districts to teach educationally disadvantaged pupils and underachieving student and is based on the number of students participating in the free and reduced lunch program (School Funding 101 Glossary).The allotment should provide for additional services and instructional support like tutoring beyond the regular school day to help at risk and disadvantaged students compensate for academic deficiencies
(School Funding 101 Glossary).
The use of the funds from compensatory education allotment could help students that are at- risk with additional programs to help them achieve in the academic setting, It could also help will fund for staff to work with students on some of the other issue that are associated with the economically disadvantage.